Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Do You Believe That Bush Committed Treason And Could Be Convicted Of It?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
DistressedAmerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 05:19 PM
Original message
Poll question: Do You Believe That Bush Committed Treason And Could Be Convicted Of It?
Edited on Sat Nov-19-05 05:20 PM by DistressedAmerican
There is a lot of talk of Bush being a traitor on DU. It got me wondering how that was defined. Did a little research.

If it came to impeachment charges, do you think we could make treason stick with the definition that is has in the constitution?

Here's some info for you before you decide...
=====================

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason

To avoid the abuses of the English law (including executions by Henry VIII of those who criticized his repeated marriages), treason was specifically defined in the United States Constitution, the only crime so defined. Article Three defines treason as only levying war against the United States or "in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort," and requires the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or a confession in open court for conviction. This safeguard may not be foolproof since Congress could pass a statute creating treason-like offenses with different names (such as sedition, bearing arms against the state, etc.) which do not require the testimony of two witnesses, and have a much wider definition than Article Three treason. For example, some well-known spies have generally been convicted of espionage rather than treason. In the United States Code the penalty ranges from "shall suffer death" to "shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

In the history of the United States there have been fewer than forty federal prosecutions for treason and even fewer convictions. Several men were convicted of treason in connection with the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion but were pardoned by President George Washington. The most famous treason trial, that of Aaron Burr in 1807, resulted in acquittal. Politically motivated attempts to convict opponents of the Jeffersonian Embargo Acts and the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 all failed. Significantly, after the American Civil War, no person involved with the Confederate States of America was charged with treason, and only one major Confederate official, the commandant of the Andersonville prison, who was charged with war crimes, was charged with anything at all. The failure to prosecute Confederates was mostly due to the words and actions of President Abraham Lincoln, who considered peace and unity more important than vengeance. During the war, Lincoln issued a proclamation of amnesty for Confederates, and in his second inaugural address (1865) pleaded for a reconciliation "with malice toward none, with charity for all."

Several people generally thought of as traitors in the United States, such as the Walker Family, or Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, were not prosecuted for treason per se, but rather for espionage. John Walker Lindh, the "American Taliban" fighter in Afghanistan, was also thought of as a traitor by many. However, instead of being tried for treason, he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to murder US nationals, aiding the Taliban and terrorist offenses relating to Al Qaeda, even though he joined the Taliban before September 11, 2001, in the period when the United States was aiding the Taliban to help their destruction of the opium crop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
IChing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. I didn't see crimes against humanity so I voted treason. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. ". . . giving aide and comfort to the enemy . . . "
*Sneak and Speck want us to stay in Iraq until they're finished with us (those Fortified Permanent Bases, however many there are supposed to be, have to be completed). Our presence in Iraq keeps the Enemy alive there, and mostly likely recruits for al Qaeda all over the world. This is "aide and comfort to the Enemy" who would not only be less in number, but also less motivated if we were Home.

We can't "proove" this because our legal system is limited in ways that does not allow us to address the "Big Picture". It does not hold people accountable for how the "Whole" is greater than the sum of its Parts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. I have no doubt that he committed treason...
look at how he shielded Saudi Arabia from any responsibility for their role in the 9/11 attacks...or his lack of action when the AQ Khan network was uncovered.

As to whether he can be prosecuted and convicted, that has yet to be seen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Syncronaut Seven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
4. Hell, he committed treason back in '73 when he willfully abandoned his post
This thing here? Much worse. Let him go to the Hague first, then we'll give him a patriot act trial here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. No Way Could We Make Treason The Charge And Get A Conviction
Thats just the way it it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ready4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
6. Should be two polls.
One poll on "Do you think Bush committed treason?"
A second on "Can Bush be convicted of it?"

I'd answer them "Yes" and "Unlikely."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WiseButAngrySara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
7. I voted Treason. Please see this related DU link. DU needs to come up
with their own articles of impeachment to be reviewed by DU legal experts and written by W. Pitt, or one of the many other fine DU writers...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5407047

http://heraldnet.com/stories/05/11/19/100let_2005111900...

Time for Congress to impeach Bush

The U. S. Constitution allows the president to be impeached for "Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors."The time has come for Congress to impeach President Bush. Articles of Impeachment should include at least:

1. Treason - squandering the U.S. military. The strength and ability of the U.S. military have been recklessly weakened by consuming it in conflicts that is not in our national interest.

2. High crimes - squandering the U.S. treasury. The financial strength of the U.S. treasury has been depleted by reckless spending combined with tax cuts. In coming years this will impair the ability of the U.S. government to function.

3. Treason - creating a foreign policy that is harmful to the interests of the U.S.

4. High crimes - lying to the U.S. Congress. While the president may chose to lie to U.S. citizens, the Congress must be provided with accurate information to base its decisions upon.

5. Misdemeanors - appointing unqualified government officials. The ability of the government to meet its commitments has been significantly reduced by the appointment of political hacks who lack the qualifications for the positions they hold.It is time to stop the continued weakening of the United States and try to limit the damage already done.Damon DarleyStanwood


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DistressedAmerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 09:13 PM
Response to Original message
8. Kicker For A Bigger Sample Size
Edited on Sat Nov-19-05 09:14 PM by DistressedAmerican
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-19-05 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
9. I would have voted "Crimes Against Humanity," but it wasn't listed.
So, I voted "Treason." - I'll be a witness, for legal purposes. ;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC